Well that's the question isn't it? I mean, you decided you were okay with a porn ban because apparently "it has been proven" that porn is damaging to children. How damaging? How solid is the science on that? Does it affect all children like this or just some?

Child psychology is a pretty fuzzy science, quantifying something like "harm" done by watching certain content is never going to be very conclusive.

Let's formulate things correctly;

I'm okay with enforcing the mature content law, which is 16 years for softcore- and 18 years for hardcore porn. I'm not okay with a blanket ban on pornography, even if I don't care for it myself.

It's not proven that porn is damaging. It's proven that porn can be damaging. It's also proven that porn can have positive effects, by the way. Ergo, nothing is good or bad in the archaic sense; there are shades of grey.

How damaging exactly is pretty well documented; there's a whole list of disorders that can be attributed to the consumation of pornographic material, especially (but not exclusively) at a young age. How young, well, that depends on the individual. But considering the fact that most 18 year olds are still idiots (especially boys), I'd say it's a safe bet to set that standard

I'm okay with enforcing the mature content law, which is 16 years for softcore- and 18 years for hardcore porn. I'm not okay with a blanket ban on pornography, even if I don't care for it myself.

It's not proven that porn is damaging. It's proven that porn can be damaging. It's also proven that porn can have positive effects, by the way. Ergo, nothing is good or bad in the archaic sense; there are shades of grey.

So your litmus test is that the government can pass laws to stop you raising your child the way you like if there are some studies (how many? what about contradictory studies?) which prove that the action in question CAN BE harmful.

Well that's pretty easily abused. How about sugar? Plenty of studies saying that can be harmful, can the government stop you giving your kids anything with sugar in it?

What exactly is the punishment anyway? If I break these laws and show my children porn - what's the punishment? Can you be fined? Jailed? Call CPS and have the kids taken away?

So your litmus test is that the government can pass laws to stop you raising your child the way you like if there are some studies (how many? what about contradictory studies?) which prove that the action in question CAN BE harmful.

Well that's pretty easily abused. How about sugar? Plenty of studies saying that can be harmful, can the government stop you giving your kids anything with sugar in it?

What exactly is the punishment anyway? If I break these laws and show my children porn - what's the punishment? Can you be fined? Jailed? Call CPS and have the kids taken away?

There are plenty of laws that prevent parents to raise their child the way they like. Thank God for that.

There are still people that think a good smack is a productive way of educating their child, for instance, eventhough it's an actual offence in more than 50 countries already.

If you want me to list the complete number of studies that corroborate the potentially detrimental effects of pornography, I'm afraid I can't help you. I did post a few interesting ones a few pages back, which might be worth reading. Those covered depression, feelings of inadequacy, impotence, addiction, desensitization and a few others. The effects among teenagers, who're ridiculously insecure to boot, can be even more serious.

I'm assuming you mean processed sugar. Again, you can't quantify harm with an archaic sense of good and bad; "sugar is bad, so ban sugar". It depends on how bad it is and what it can cause in the long run.

The punishments will mostly be in the form of fines and I suspect it's the provider of pornographic material that will get them, not the user. Kind of like a bar that serves alcohol to minors.

Giving your info to enter those sites --- so bad idea. Everyone will just start using Vpn in Britan. Even adults.
And if those sites have any moneymaking metods from users, they will lose quite a lot of them in britan.

Not to mention the sites that ignore Uk laws will simply get more trafic. Even if they remove it from gogle search, people will just use DuckDuckgo or other similar search engines.

Will this law protect kids? Nope. Maybe ones that dont know how to use Pc.

I really hate what is happening to this country, cheered on by the looney authoritarians in the LibLabCon parties. It's absolute madness that the only mainstream party in the UK supporting free speech and a free internet is UKIP.

A lot of millennials who grew up with the internet and surveillance are used to the nanny state big government here, much the Chinese are used to it. For those of us who grew up in the 80s and 90s or earlier it's all very sad how this country has been destroyed.

what else to expect from country which makes complete clown of itself with brexit

- - - Updated - - -

Originally Posted by Heran

After all my tours to pattaya and phuket, there has been a drastic change in what people want to do to you over the years. When I was 18-20, I never encountered any guy that wanted to shove their fist places where it doesn't belong or who wanted to choke me or who tried to force me to do things I didn't want to do.

sure people should artificially surpress their fetishes

and let me guess only do it in missionary with lights turned off

- - - Updated - - -

Originally Posted by Sciborg

It's good that the UK government is trying to teach kids more about the internet by encouraging them to explore and understand the usage of VPNs.

You realize the moment this becomes the common go to way for everything, the legislative will try to ban these in the UK. It would not be the first time politicans try to ban technical methods that are central to modern technology, I mean it was only a couple of years ago that we had some bitch about encryption being evil because they can't read your conversations anymore. The authoritarian mindset of these people is deeply rooted and people not respecting their half-assed laws will just spurn them on to come up with more technically illiterate laws.

I'm assuming you mean processed sugar. Again, you can't quantify harm with an archaic sense of good and bad; "sugar is bad, so ban sugar". It depends on how bad it is and what it can cause in the long run.

Well the devil's in the detail then, isn't it? Where exactly is your line for how harmful something has to be that allows you to put porn in the "okay for the government to tell you how to raise your kid" pile, but sugar or meat in the "not okay" pile? How do you quantify that?

Originally Posted by nocturnus

The punishments will mostly be in the form of fines and I suspect it's the provider of pornographic material that will get them, not the user. Kind of like a bar that serves alcohol to minors.

No, you're not following - imagine the father decides his 10 year old kid is old enough to drink, buys beer and gives it to him. Can you punish the bar?

So if I buy porn (haha, I mean more likely google it) and show it to my kids - what then?

Well the devil's in the detail then, isn't it? Where exactly is your line for how harmful something has to be that allows you to put porn in the "okay for the government to tell you how to raise your kid" pile, but sugar or meat in the "not okay" pile? How do you quantify that?

There are protocols in place for most things with a grey area; Free speech, disciplining your pet, showing your kid a horror flick, etc. I'll admit it's not an easy task, especially with things that aren't arbitrary right or wrong. Not too long a go, a good smack on the cheek was considered viable parenting. New evidence comes to light at an increasingly rapid pace and legislation follows.

Originally Posted by Mormolyce

No, you're not following - imagine the father decides his 10 year old kid is old enough to drink, buys beer and gives it to him. Can you punish the bar?

Yes, absolutely. The owner will most likely lose his licence and the father his kid; that's how it works.

Originally Posted by Mormolyce

So if I buy porn (haha, I mean more likely google it) and show it to my kids - what then?

A lot can happen. If your kid starts to display abnormal behaviour at school, for instance, the teachers can raise a red flag. It happens all the time with abuse.

I can see this law not lasting very long in all fairness, I am all for protecting kids from content they shouldn't really be seeing - however the personal data concerns as well as the prevalence of VPN technology means that the ability to bypass this for the majority of people who are technically inclined means its not really going to be as effective as the government thinks it is.

Best way to approach this issue in my opinion? better sex education at school age in order to educate properly what its all about, rather than taking stupid actions like this.

You're still not getting this. The father goes to the store alone and buys a beer. He goes home and gives it to his son. Now what?

Oh, I'm getting it, but it's a moot point, isn't it? There is no cut and dried solution for shrouded abuse. There are cases of parents giving babies alprazolam because they were crying, or attendants abusing children at day care, etc. This all happens behind close doors and is quite difficult to uncover unless you have a sharp eye for behavioural deviations which professional educators usually have, hence the afore-mentioned "red flags".

Originally Posted by Mormolyce

I'm saying LEGALLY.

Do you mean to ask what could happen to you from a legal perspective? In this case, I'm not sure though but I suspect it would depend on the child's age.

I'm quite curious about this as well; isn't there any information online about the consequences of cirumventing the age-check and accessing porn anyway?

Oh, I'm getting it, but it's a moot point, isn't it? There is no cut and dried solution for shrouded abuse. There are cases of parents giving babies alprazolam because they were crying, or attendants abusing children at day care, etc. This all happens behind close doors and is quite difficult to uncover unless you have a sharp eye for behavioural deviations which professional educators usually have, hence the afore-mentioned "red flags".

It's not a moot point, at the moment society controls access to alcohol by prohibiting the sale of alcohol to minors - the vendors are punished if they break that law. But you can buy a beer for your under-age child, the state doesn't currently have the right to tell you how to raise your kids. Ie, whether or not your child is allowed to drink under the state-mandated age is left up to the parents.

Same situation with film classifications and restrictions. You can punish a theater for letting a child into a restricted film. But if a parent decides to allow their kid to see it, they can.

You're talking about a change to that, where the state CAN intervene in that parent's decision.

Originally Posted by nocturnus

Do you mean to ask what could happen to you from a legal perspective? In this case, I'm not sure though but I suspect it would depend on the child's age.

I'm quite curious about this as well; isn't there any information online about the consequences of cirumventing the age-check and accessing porn anyway?

As far as I know there isn't any law against a parent choosing to show a child a film classified as adults only. That's their prerogative.

Whether or not you can classify showing a child sexual content as a parenting choice, or if the state has a right to intervene and call that child abuse, is the exact grey area I'm asking you to think about.

It's not a moot point, at the moment society controls access to alcohol by prohibiting the sale of alcohol to minors - the vendors are punished if they break that law. But you can buy a beer for your under-age child, the state doesn't currently have the right to tell you how to raise your kids. Ie, whether or not your child is allowed to drink under the state-mandated age is left up to the parents.

Same situation with film classifications and restrictions. You can punish a theater for letting a child into a restricted film. But if a parent decides to allow their kid to see it, they can.

You're talking about a change to that, where the state CAN intervene in that parent's decision.

As far as I know there isn't any law against a parent choosing to show a child a film classified as adults only. That's their prerogative.

Whether or not you can classify showing a child sexual content as a parenting choice, or if the state has a right to intervene and call that child abuse, is the exact grey area I'm asking you to think about.

- - - Updated - - -

That was my point. Same in the US I believe.

I don’t know where you’re from, but here you will lose your kid if anyone sees him or her watch porn with cold one. Needless to say, we’re not talking about 16 year olds here. A moot point because there isn’t a solution. Moot = often discussed, without a definite answer or solution.

Anyway, I feel like the vehemence for the subject has died, for good reason, therefore I’ll leave it at this.